Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People here do not seem to understand that successful engineers and scientists need to be creative to do their job.

For real. People are not going to be successful engineers and scientists by just reading lots of books and doing problem sets. We do need more creativity and critical thinking. However, I am also a little skeptical that a STEAM curriculum is going to fix the problems. We'd probably be better off in all the subjects if we just kept all the devices out of kids hands until their frontal lobes were more mature and so they have some form of attention span left.

The A wasn't added to STEM to make engineers more creative, it was added to make gateway activities more interesting to those who aren't already interested in STEM. The hope is that some of those kids will become interested in STEM and pursue a career in it.

Creativity required in engineering isn't about adding art.

Of course it is about art. The greatest designers of our time were well versed in contemporary art and art history. You can’t be a good designer without cultural understanding. Where did you even get that idea in the first place?

Perhaps this interdisciplinary venture should work both ways. Engineers can take art history. Art school students should all take physics and calculus, and then perhaps we'd have more Da Vincis and fewer bananas duct taped to walls.

Obviously you don’t know many professional artists or designers. Art school students do take science classes and science and math are integral to any modern design work. The engineering students are the ones who are deficient in art and cultural understanding while the art students are often working with engineering concepts every day.

And by the way, you seem really offended, but I was not trying to dis artists (except for the ones who tape bananas to walls and call it art.) I'm the one who posted a while ago explaining that the A is really about design, so yes I know that design in a few industries is a good intersection of art and stem. And I do think artists should take science and engineers can benefit from art. However, to be real, even though some areas of art and science have natural things in common, not ALL areas of art and science will need to intersect.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People here do not seem to understand that successful engineers and scientists need to be creative to do their job.

For real. People are not going to be successful engineers and scientists by just reading lots of books and doing problem sets. We do need more creativity and critical thinking. However, I am also a little skeptical that a STEAM curriculum is going to fix the problems. We'd probably be better off in all the subjects if we just kept all the devices out of kids hands until their frontal lobes were more mature and so they have some form of attention span left.

The A wasn't added to STEM to make engineers more creative, it was added to make gateway activities more interesting to those who aren't already interested in STEM. The hope is that some of those kids will become interested in STEM and pursue a career in it.

Creativity required in engineering isn't about adding art.

Of course it is about art. The greatest designers of our time were well versed in contemporary art and art history. You can’t be a good designer without cultural understanding. Where did you even get that idea in the first place?

Perhaps this interdisciplinary venture should work both ways. Engineers can take art history. Art school students should all take physics and calculus, and then perhaps we'd have more Da Vincis and fewer bananas duct taped to walls.

Obviously you don’t know many professional artists or designers. Art school students do take science classes and science and math are integral to any modern design work. The engineering students are the ones who are deficient in art and cultural understanding while the art students are often working with engineering concepts every day.

You are delusional and pretending that this is the majority of arts students. I know plenty of fine arts and performing arts kids. A select few of them really want to take the most advanced AP physics and calc courses, but guess what, the arts high school does not even offer them. There's not enough students wanting to take these courses (except for some reason, the classical musicians). Anyone who wants an advanced science or math class has to do dual enrollment. I think cross disciplinary stuff is great, and if you want to make the case it should happen more often, then fine, but let's not pretend it's a common thing to do.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People here do not seem to understand that successful engineers and scientists need to be creative to do their job.

For real. People are not going to be successful engineers and scientists by just reading lots of books and doing problem sets. We do need more creativity and critical thinking. However, I am also a little skeptical that a STEAM curriculum is going to fix the problems. We'd probably be better off in all the subjects if we just kept all the devices out of kids hands until their frontal lobes were more mature and so they have some form of attention span left.

The A wasn't added to STEM to make engineers more creative, it was added to make gateway activities more interesting to those who aren't already interested in STEM. The hope is that some of those kids will become interested in STEM and pursue a career in it.

Creativity required in engineering isn't about adding art.

Of course it is about art. The greatest designers of our time were well versed in contemporary art and art history. You can’t be a good designer without cultural understanding. Where did you even get that idea in the first place?

Perhaps this interdisciplinary venture should work both ways. Engineers can take art history. Art school students should all take physics and calculus, and then perhaps we'd have more Da Vincis and fewer bananas duct taped to walls.

Obviously you don’t know many professional artists or designers. Art school students do take science classes and science and math are integral to any modern design work. The engineering students are the ones who are deficient in art and cultural understanding while the art students are often working with engineering concepts every day.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People here do not seem to understand that successful engineers and scientists need to be creative to do their job.

For real. People are not going to be successful engineers and scientists by just reading lots of books and doing problem sets. We do need more creativity and critical thinking. However, I am also a little skeptical that a STEAM curriculum is going to fix the problems. We'd probably be better off in all the subjects if we just kept all the devices out of kids hands until their frontal lobes were more mature and so they have some form of attention span left.

The A wasn't added to STEM to make engineers more creative, it was added to make gateway activities more interesting to those who aren't already interested in STEM. The hope is that some of those kids will become interested in STEM and pursue a career in it.

Creativity required in engineering isn't about adding art.

Of course it is about art. The greatest designers of our time were well versed in contemporary art and art history. You can’t be a good designer without cultural understanding. Where did you even get that idea in the first place?

Perhaps this interdisciplinary venture should work both ways. Engineers can take art history. Art school students should all take physics and calculus, and then perhaps we'd have more Da Vincis and fewer bananas duct taped to walls.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People here do not seem to understand that successful engineers and scientists need to be creative to do their job.

For real. People are not going to be successful engineers and scientists by just reading lots of books and doing problem sets. We do need more creativity and critical thinking. However, I am also a little skeptical that a STEAM curriculum is going to fix the problems. We'd probably be better off in all the subjects if we just kept all the devices out of kids hands until their frontal lobes were more mature and so they have some form of attention span left.

The A wasn't added to STEM to make engineers more creative, it was added to make gateway activities more interesting to those who aren't already interested in STEM. The hope is that some of those kids will become interested in STEM and pursue a career in it.

Creativity required in engineering isn't about adding art.

Of course it is about art. The greatest designers of our time were well versed in contemporary art and art history. You can’t be a good designer without cultural understanding. Where did you even get that idea in the first place?